Dan Savage Has Had Enough Of ‘Pasty White’ Jill Stein Supporters

[Haveadream]

Dan Savage is not buying what Stein or her supporters are selling. He says what so many Democrats are thinking about Jill Stein's Presidential bid and the liberal fools who will vote for her: "Only privileged groups can afford to risk a Trump presidency", the podcast host argued in an epic rant.

Go Dan!

Dan Savage, sex-advice columnist and host of popular podcast “Savage Lovecast,” has some strong arguments against fed-up progressives voting for Jill Stein, the Green Party presidential candidate...Rather than merely run candidates in presidential elections when the stakes are highest and the spotlight greatest, Savage said marginal political parties should make a better effort to develop their presence at the state and local level before making a run for the White House.

“I have a problem with these fake, attention-seeking, grandstanding Green/Libertarian party candidates who pop up every four years, like mushrooms in sh*t, saying that they’re building a third party,” Savage opined..

.

Savage also rejected some of the circular logic of progressives backing third-party candidates. On the one hand, these voters argue that there is no difference between Democratic and Republican presidential candidates, and on the other hand, they suggest that allowing the more conservative of the two to be elected would lead to such extreme conditions that it would spark a “revolution,” Savage said....Savage noted that the Republican and Democratic candidates can either be indistinguishable, or one can be so extreme that it would prompt a revolution, but not both.

“They’re exactly the same, exactly as awful, but one would bring the revolution and one wouldn’t,” he said. “Which means they weren’t exactly the same and they weren’t equally awful.”

“Disaster will come” if Trump is president, Savage stated. “And the people who’ll suffer are not going to be the pasty white Green Party supporters — pasty white Jill Stein and her pasty white supporters. The people who’ll suffer are going to be people of color. People of minority faiths. Queer people. Women.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/dan-savage-jill-stein_us_578fa239e4b04ca54ebfbc1c

[tonyt53]

1. Don't really care for the guy, but on this matter i agree 100%. He nailed it.

[Haveadream]

2. He really did!

He has sometimes been slow to get with the issues outside his own and it is good to see him expanding his SJ perspective!

[Loki Liesmith]

8. What issues does he not pass muster on?

[Haveadream]

12. In the past he has been tone deaf on some LBTQ issues

and the community has taken him to task on that. He seems to have come around a lot.

[GoCubsGo]

122. Actually, he got it 99% right.

The only thing he had wrong is that Stein and her ilk won't suffer under a Trump presidency. Unless they're part of the uber-wealthy circles in which Trump and his hellspawn run, they'll likely get screwed along with the rest of us, one way or another. They aren't privileged enough to be spared.

[Hortensis]

129. Not that good. He called Greens "liberals,"

which is kind of like referring to Malheur occupiers as "conservatives," as if that's what a conservative is. Works if what you're trying to do is insult disapproving conservatives, but otherwise no.

[GoCubsGo]

137. So, if Greens aren't liberal, what are they?

They sure as hell aren't conservatives.

[Hortensis]

138. My main point is Green does not mean liberal.

I didn't say some Greens can't be liberal.

But liberal is a personality type before it is a political orientation, and some on the farther left are not strongly liberal in personality, or liberal at all. Some may be a mix of liberal plus more radical, extremist traits. Others are just plain extremist.

My guess is some Greens are probably pretty solidly liberal, some a mix of liberal and extremist traits, and some generally extremist.

One good clue is presence of antagonism/hostility toward Democrats. Liberals are relatively lower than both conservatives and the farther left in hostility toward anyone. A liberal may disapprove of Democrats, but repeated definite hostility toward Democrats? THAT you see among people with at least radical/extremist traits.

And of course you see a full range of those behaviors among the Greens, as well as other behaviors not widely characteristic of liberals, such as strong intolerance of anyone who disagrees with them and profound dishonesty about Democrats.

[CrowCityDem]

3. Plus, Jill Stein is about as detestable a person as a progressive can be.

[LynneSin]

37. "But I want that President to reflect the values of being a mother" - Stein

I agree w/ Hillary, it's time to elect a woman for President. But I want that President to reflect the values of being a mother.

This is what Jill Stein said about Hillary Clinton ON MOTHER'S DAY.

Jill Stein can go *#% herself. There are many things one can say negatively about Hillary Clinton but for one woman to smear another woman about her ability to be a mother ON MOTHER'S DAY. I have no respect whatsoever for Dr. Stein. She is nothing more than a publicity whore who thinks somehow she is doing something to make a difference in this country. Even Bernie Sanders endorsed Hillary over her.

[seaglass]

48. Between that and her celebration of Juneteenth with a room full of white people - lost all respect

for her. She is from my home state, I agree with her on a lot of issues, but she is actually an asshole.

http://www.dailydot.com/layer8/jill-stein-juneteenth-tweet-backlash/

[Demsrule86]

80. I can't stand any of them.

They accomplish nothing and only slow and in some case (2000) stop progressive policy from making gains.

[LynneSin]

83. Omg! She did that?

That would be something I expect from Trump and his supporters!

[Agschmid]

128. I end up grocery shopping with her quite often...

Not impressed.

[RockaFowler]

109. That made me turn against her, too

Plus all she does is bash Hillary (along with Susan Sarandon) on Twitter. Tell me what you are for Ms. Stein. I have no idea!!

[GoneOffShore]

142. Are we sure Jill Stein isn't a Ralph Nader clone?

I was more than willing to support the Greens in local races, until I encountered Stein's anti-science views on homeopathy and vaccinations.

She's moved over to the loon side.

[SylviaD]

45. How so? nt

[CrowCityDem]

58. Those comments about motherhood the other reply mentioned, for one.

For another, seeing the existential threat Trump is to the America we know, she's still bashing Bernie for not abandoning his word and propping up the rotten carcass of the Greens.

[SylviaD]

100. You may be right but...

...my husband's cousin knows her and has worked with her. He says she is a good person.

[CrowCityDem]

101. That could be. As a politician, she shows the worst traits of a Trump, with a cleaner mouth.

[Her Sister]

4. Yep, well said!

So clear!

[Paladin]

5. Dan Savage hits another home run. (nt)

[JustAnotherGen]

6. Well said Mr. Savage

[freshwest]

46. Brought me out of out of hibernation, this OP!

[In_The_Wind]

120. Missed you!

[sufrommich]

7. He could have summed it up with one sentence:

"some people just want to watch the world burn".

[Haveadream]

9. Great point, sufrommich!

That is something the far left and right have in common. They revel in the idea as long as they are the ones carrying the torches. They somehow think they will be spared when the fire gets out of control.

[NWCorona]

11. Alfred said it best

[LynneSin]

39. How easy is it to watch the world burn from within our 'fire-safe house'

People who have good jobs, decent homes and salaries who let's face it, tend to also be white (I am) - they are not thinking about the entire country when they support someone like Jill Stein. A vote for Stein is a vote for selfishness and no better than people who vote for Trump because of their greediness.

[Hortensis]

130. Well, to be fair, large numbers of POC do

also have good jobs, decent homes, etc., just not in the percentages they could now thanks to the takeover of conservative income ideology and the disappearance of so many good jobs. In any case it was never entirely true that to be black was to be poor, or helpless, and certainly not now.

Thanks to the fact that blacks are only 13% of the population, there are also a whole lot more poor whites to be hurt by electing those dysfunctional regressives on the right. And others, of course.

[calimary]

65. TOTALLY true, sufrommich.

I watched a video clip of her interview with Maria Bartiromo and friends - where she went on and on with her pie-in-the-sky crap about how all we have to do is cancel the debt, and we'll have the economy of our DREAMS! Her babblings were so dithering and addled and incomprehensible that I literally started feeling dizzy. My eyes started crossing. I thought I was listening to "Word Salad Time" with sarah palin. I kept wondering - "THIS is a Harvard MD???????" I actually had to bail out of the video clip about halfway through. I just couldn't take any more of it.

I kept shaking my head and thinking - people actually want to vote for this ding-dong? To make WHAT point? To send WHAT message? (Other than "Hi! My name is Idiot!"?

[uponit7771]

115. Amen, mostly cause "their" world wont be burn the hottest

[bigwillq]

10. Vote your conscience, Dan.

As I hope everyone will.

[hrmjustin]

13. I will be and that is why I am voting for Hillary.

[bigwillq]

16. Awesome!

[okasha]

114. Likewise.

Now, I wish we did have a strong Green Party with viable candidates. But we don't, and we won't as long as it remains nothing but a vehicle for Jill Stein's ego. Only Hillary has a plan to address climate change. If we don't deal with that problem, the other issues don't matter.

[NCTraveler]

14. Ted Cruz sure is. lol.

I agree, people should vote their conscience.

Edit to add: K&R for the op. Stein is the embodiment of entitlement and her base is a mirror image.

[bigwillq]

17. Best thing Cruz ever said.

Lol

[Haveadream]

19. Ted Cruz is with her!

Thanks, Ted!

[Ellen Forradalom]

33. Tell me about it

I have a shining example of that leftist male entitlement in my own damn family who told me that unlike Hillary, Jill Stein was a "REAL WOMAN." I had nothing against her up to that point but if that's what her supporters say I do now.

[NCTraveler]

40. That is truly sad. nt.

[Hortensis]

131. Lot of extremist intellect scrambling in that sphere.

Honesty takes a permanent holiday so rationalization can move in.

I had something generally like that said to me once, so I asked what a real woman was and how I needed to change to become one. He literally couldn't come up with even an incoherent half response, much less a whole sentence to explain. Apparently Limbaugh hadn't fed him a catchphrase and his comment on womanhood was him trying to fly free.

[frazzled]

18. And if your conscience doesn't give a damn about

the other 323,729,999 Americans whose welfare will suffer under a Trump presidency, vote for Stein. If your conscience doesn't tremble at the economic, diplomatic, and social depredations that would most certainly befall the country under a Trump presidency, then vote your conscience.

I won't think your conscience has much of a moral or ethical core.

To be a political animal of a liberal or progressive stripe means considering the common good, not your own damned conscience.

[BobbyDrake]

23. +1! Isn't it odd seeing "vote your conscience" being used as cover for not doing the right thing?

This whole white progressive entitlement nonsense is moving into "beyond ridiculous" territory. Susan Sarandon really exposed this idiocy with her "Trump will bring the revolution" brain-fart.

We should absolutely criticize Green enablers for gambling the rights and safety of women and minorities all over America in some bass-ackwards plot to make America worse enough for the Greens to take over. Do they really think that the American people who saw the Greens do nothing to stop Trump now are going to trust them to do something to stop Trump later? Talk about hubris.

[bigwillq]

31. The Greens or Libertarians or any other third party

Will have little impact on the 2016 race.

A large majority will vote for either the R or D.

Clinton and Trump will win or lose on their own merit, and because a small portion decided to vote for someone else.

[Ellen Forradalom]

34. I've been jumpy

ever since 2000.

But yeah, Stein is no Nader.

[bigwillq]

43. I don't believe Nader was the reason Gore "lost"

Sure, Nader was the scapegoat because it came down to Florida but Gore was not a good candidate, imo; he couldn't even win his home state. He didn't motivate enough people in the swing states to vote for him. No one's fault but his own.

[avaistheone1]

70. You are correct.

Gore did win. People who scapegoat Nader are ignorant of the facts.
http://fair.org/extra/who-won-the-election-who-cares/

[Demsrule86]

88. Nader lowered Gores vote by taking votes

which allowed The GOP to steal the election...it was their fault after they ran Gore down for over a year.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

125. Gore did win but Nader made it possible for Bush to steal the election.He was a part of allowing

a Bush presidency.

[Demsrule86]

87. The Greens and Nader are the reason for Gore's loss.

They spent all year much like this year whining about how the parties are both the same...or a Bush win would not be so...bad...well it was terrible. Had Nader not run Gore would have been presidient...many would still be alive today who died under the Bush presidency...9-11, wars, Katrina and eight years with many people having no chance at health care...And Trump would be way worse.I dislike Stein particularly. The Greens are traitors to all progressives and are dead to me.

[Old and In the Way]

126. Corget Florida. Look at New Hampshire.

Had Nader kept his word and stayed out of close contezts.
,Gore wins in NH and Florida doesn"t matter.

[one_voice]

27. Some people must think this is a movie...

and when the shit storm hits a hero is gonna rush in and save the day. WRONG!

I'm pretty sure some just wanna complain about EVERYTHING & you know what they say: 'Misery loves company'.

Two things:

1) Either they can survive a Trump presidency & possibly a repuke controlled house/senate. In which case they're no better than the 'I've got mine so fuck you' repukes.

2) They're by nature miserable fucks who think everyone should be as miserable as them. In which case-fuck them. I hope they suffer A LOT under a repuke government. I hope they have to watch people they love suffer--though that probably won't matter because it will just give them more to bitch about.

After watching the RNC thus far, I'm not even trying to give those selfish fuckwads a break. They didn't get who they wanted and now they want to watch the country burn. FOH.

[LanternWaste]

35. Except that for so many, the common good is part and parcel of that inconvenient "damned conscience"

Except that for so many, the common good is part and parcel of that inconvenient "damned conscience" you so righteously rail against.

[frazzled]

41. No ...

We can all accept that Jill Stein (who has never been elected to any office, though she's tried for dozens of them) will not become President of the United States. That's an incontrovertible fact. A given. So what happens when you vote for Jill Stein? You take away a vote from Hillary Clinton. And every vote taken away from Hillary Clinton strengthens Donald Trump's chances.

A vote for Stein is, in practice, a vote for Trump. That's a fact, too.

If you are only concerned with the self-interest of your conscience, you will allow this to happen. Which makes you not a progressive, and not a liberal, and probably not even a moral person. It just makes you selfish.

[Demsrule86]

84. +1 nt

[Silent3]

136. +1 n/t

[BlancheSplanchnik]

44. I will. I'll be voting for Hilary and a straight dem ticket.....

The problems with "just vote your conscience"?

1). The information people are using is so twisted, some people think they're conscience is telling them the right thing; but it's based on disinformation.

2) In an unfortunately high number of people, the conscience is a vestigial organ.

[bigwillq]

49. That's awesome.

Happy you are voting for Hillary and DEMs.

[Demsrule86]

82. If you have a conscience, you will vote for Hillary.

The horror that a Trump presidency would unleash would be terrible for everyone really but in particular LGBT, people of color, immigrants and women.

[TexasBushwhacker]

144. If you don't live in a swing state

As I don't (Texas obviously) feel free to vote for Stein or Bernie or Elmo for all I care. But please please vote for Hillary if your vote counts in the GE.

While I like some of the principles of the Greens, Stein bugs me because of her unwillingness to start at the bottom. Run for congress and serve FIRST. You know, like BERNIE. Hell, like Rand Paul.

[RandySF]

15. Why won't the Greens put effort into local government?

They can won more elections for less money, do more to positively impact people's everyday lives and build a bench.

[BobbyDrake]

20. They want to complain, not be in charge. If they're in charge, they'd have to

complain about themselves.

Your question strikes at the very heart of why mainstream Americans don't take Greens seriously: because the Greens themselves are unserious about politics.

Seeing someone advocate for Greens as they are now is a good way to identify someone who knows less-than-nothing about politics.

[Haveadream]

28. Stein certainly fits that description

So much of her message is about what is wrong rather than how she will make things right. It is easy to complain but very difficult to effect change and we have yet to see how she has any of the means necessary to do that.

[redwitch]

36. They actually do that.

I am married to a Green.

[Ellen Forradalom]

38. They were doing that for a while

I recall some positive press coverage in the 90s of Greens winning some local offices.
Not since the Nader campaign, though.

[uponit7771]

116. +1, It takes way less effort to complain than to actually be "progress"

[sarae]

21. K&R!

[liberalnarb]

22. He's 100% correct about the Stein supporters

Though I wish I didn't have to see the phrase "Liberal fools" on a Liberal discussion board.

[Haveadream]

25. I agree

Unfortunately, there have sometimes been enough of them to throw the reins of power right into Republican hands causing decades of damage and loss of rights. Although they have many liberal sensibilities, some are recklessly foolish for not being able to anticipate the dangerous results of their caprice.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

47. ^. nt

[CobaltBlue]

24. Dan Savage should be confident

When your party nominated the best candidate, you don’t feel a need to issue lectures to anyone who usually self-identifies with, and votes for, the party.

[grossproffit]

127. Uh huh.

[Maru Kitteh]

139. Foaming bull excrement. The Green party doesn't exist to vote for Democrats.

Trump, Johnson and Stein are all opposition candidates from opposition parties. Democrats nominated our best candidate, and we have seen before what happens when we just ignore opposition parties, candidates, and the special snowflakes that shill for them. Unambiguous illumination is precisely what is called for, and it was delivered.

[GoneOffShore]

143. At this point: Cool story, bro.

I supported Bernie and his ideas. He lost. I'm not taking my vote anywhere but to HRC because, although I'm not fond of her (nor WJC, who is only mildly less objectionable than a good many people out there), the Drumpfer and his supporters frighten the bejesus out of me.

[JaneyVee]

26. Jill Stein has even less minority support than Bernie and Trump.

Do Jill fans not care about solidarity with marginalized groups?

[Eric J in MN]

79. In the 2008 primary, did you vote for Obama for solidarity? NT

NT

[JaneyVee]

95. Both O and HRC had huge minority support.

[Eric J in MN]

98. In Pennsylvania

...HRC got 10% of the black vote in 2008. Sanders got 30% of the black vote there this year.

In some states, she got a bigger percentage of the black vote in 2008 than Sanders this year, but overall the black vote was a landslide for Obama in the 2008 primaries and a landslide for HRC in this year's primaries.

[XemaSab]

123. I hate this "X group knows better than you do!" nonsense

It's nothing more than liberal racism.

People of color don't have any special knowledge or understanding. They get into stupid wars and kill each other just like white people do.

[Tarc]

29. Jill Stein is a white-privileged ass

That is all.

[Fast Walker 52]

55. does seem that way, plus just a weaselly opportunist

[Eric J in MN]

89. Dan Savage is an affluent white man. NT

NT

[Tarc]

119. Dan Savage is gay, the type of person that the GOP base wants to either

"rehabilitate" or murder.

Jill Stein is an asshole. Period.

[obamanut2012]

133. Dan Savage is gay, and would roar with laughter at being called "wealthy"

[obamanut2012]

132. And an anti vaxxer

[Tarc]

134. Ew, really?

I did not know that. Makes her even worse.

[mountain grammy]

30. Dan Savage moves on.. we all must.

[spanzini]

32. Cornel West isn't pasty white

Who does Dan Savage think he is anyway?

[stevenleser]

51. There was an African American speaker at the RNC too. Using outliers to try to prove your point

doesnt prove your point.

[Demsrule86]

91. One guy

And Cornell is well off enough to survive. Of course, he apparently does not care if others no so fortunate survive.

[TheSarcastinator]

42. is this the same D. Savage who claimed those who opposed the illegal invasion of Iraq

hated homosexuals?

He's a sex advice columnist who teaches people how to pee on each other. I don't give a damn what he "thinks", any more than I care what Ted Nugent "thinks".

http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/say-yes-to-war-on-iraq/Content?oid=12237

"You see, lefties, there are times when saying "no" to war means saying "yes" to oppression. Don't believe me? Go ask a Czech or a European Jew about the British and French saying "no" to war with Germany in 1938. War may be bad for children and other living things, but there are times when peace is worse for children and other living things, and this is one of those times. Saying no to war in Iraq means saying yes to the continued oppression of the Iraqi people. It amazes me when I hear lefties argue that we should assassinate Saddam in order to avoid war. If Saddam is assassinated, he will be replaced by another Baathist dictator--and what then for the people of Iraq? More "peace"--i.e., more oppression, more executions, more gassings, more terror, more fear."

On edit: it is of interest to me that many here use the same tactics against Stein that Trumpians are using against Hillary. It's very telling.

[stevenleser]

52. So your argument is he was wrong about one thing once so he can never be right even when its obvious

that he is?

That's not much of an argument.

[TheSarcastinator]

57. Keep up those Trumpian tactics, you savvy strategists!

To Keep calling Stein supporters (and yes, I will be voting for Hillary, so you can put away your purity test and pitchfork) "pasty white" and then insult them is both racist and incredibly stupid. Even when Dan Savage is right, he is wrong. And if you think this is the most effective way to speak for a campaign, you're wrong too.

[stevenleser]

66. Calling what I said "Trumpian" doesn't mean anything. nt

[BobbyDrake]

107. He wasn't even wrong. His point was that inaction can be worse than action under

certain conditions. Too many fake progressives around here have illogical love for dictators.

[anoNY42]

50. Hooray

Screw voting for the best candidate, screw voting your conscience, screw voting for the person who agrees with you most. According to Savage you have to vote Blue because....Red!

Also, voting for someone you actually want to see as President is now racist (see "pasty white" comments).

This rant makes me think less of Dan Savage...

[stevenleser]

53. And you just articulated the privileged argument perfectly.

If you know your actions will screw Latinos, Women and various other minorities but you do it anyway because it wont hurt you at all or nearly as much, then yes, you are voting out of a privileged, "who cares about those other people", mindset.

[tonyt53]

60. Bingo

[TheSarcastinator]

61. which Dan Savage is absolutely reinforcing with his angry screed

Do you really believe anyone will be persuaded to vote for (soon to be) Pres. Clinton based on this type of hyperbolic insult and smear?

[Demsrule86]

96. He is correct and yes he might make some stop

and think about others instead of their own selfish motives...mostly bitterness that their guy did not win.

[uponit7771]

117. Amen and Amen!!!

[whatthehey]

62. And in the real world...

One of two people will be President next year. Stein is not one of the two. You can stamp your feet in futile tantrums all you want about "conscience", the meaning of which apparently has now morphed into "fuck the rest of you; I want to bathe myself in a purist patina so as to seem enlightened at the next vegan Indigo Children potluck", but you like everyone else only get to pick between alternate futures with either Trump or Clinton in possession of appointment, veto and CIC powers for the next few years. There is no option C in reality.

[TheSarcastinator]

63. another brilliant bit of persuasion!

This thread is a perfect illustration of why the poll numbers are as close as they are. Campaign Clinton should be taking the high road at every opportunity -- that excellent ad that features kids watching Trump on TV is a fine example -- not engaging in this type of hyperbolic personal attack on anyone who dares disagree.

Do you really believe that the language you used in your post is going to persuade anyone to vote for Hillary? I don't. You're just throwing a nasty little vicious temper tantrum because everyone hasn't automatically defaulted to your perspective. It's ugly, and incredibly stupid from a tactical perspective.

You're treating Stein supporters -- very much potential allies in the coming election -- the same way Trumpians treat Hillary and her supporters. Low ethos, and terrible strategy. Democrats need to take the high road every time, especially in this election.

[whatthehey]

68. "Potential allies" will vote for the better future. Idiots will throw away that privilege.

I am not so arrogant as to imagine whatever I say as an obscure poster on an obscure partisan forum will make the slightest whit of difference. Anyone so mentally and morally stunted as to change their voting intention on those grounds is a waste of skin whose concerns are not worth considering for a second.

I mean fuck it, imagine what vapid nonentity would seriously think "well, I know Trump will plunge us into a depression, multiple wars, a fascist uprising and an unending race riot whereas Clinton is a bit chummy with high finance folks but will more or less stay the course. That said an anonymous internet poster who wants everyone to pick Clinton hurt my poor widdle fee-fees so I'll throw away my vote on an irrelevant protest candidate to spite them. Fuck the country, I'll show that guy who I don't know and doesn't know me!"

If that's a potential ally I'm Ming the Merciless. That's nothing but a moron.

[anoNY42]

85. Not convincing me

sorry, but that tone is what I would have expected from my Trump-supporting neighbor...

[anoNY42]

72. Yawn

You are wedded to a two-party system.

[whatthehey]

77. I'm wedded to the reality in which the US *has* a two party system, not dreaming of what-ifs

When we change the Constitution to have proportional representation or IRV or another system which allows third parties to become relevant, feel free to wake up from that nap that has you both yawning and dreaming so much and we can talk third parties as serious political options until the cows come home. Absent those changes though they have as much chance of legislating or executing executive authority as Vermin Supreme.

[anoNY42]

78. You talk of changing the system

but how would you do that if the current two parties are always comfortably in power?

Anyway, we should not be insulting those who are currently supporting third-party candidates, as Dan Savage did. Those are votes we need to convince to come over to us. In that sense, you yourself are supporting Trump by being insulting.

[whatthehey]

81. See post 68

[Haveadream]

105. DUers are generally wedded to the Democratic Party

and discuss that here on a forum created to support Democrats. The number of parties in the system doesn't have much to do with that.

[arcane1]

54. How fucking embarrassing, that Trump has even a fraction of a chance of winning

I hope the Dems take a long look in the mirror after 2016, and ask themselves why it's so hard for them to beat a moron who doesn't even want the job.

[stevenleser]

56. That's easy to answer. The Republicans spend years beating up the most prominent Democrats

to make it difficult for them to win.

Anytime a Democrat emerges who looks like they could be a potential national candidate, the swarming attacks start.

[bettyellen]

110. I also have friends blaming Dems for what the Republicans do! Delusional.

Thanks for the pithy reply. Are you meeting me and Pri at Rudy's later?

[stevenleser]

121. Just saw your response. Hard for me to attend anything these days.

I sign up and then work or baby duties become overwhelming. Hope you guys had a great time!

[Haveadream]

102. Even more embarrassing and dangerous are the number of Americans who actively support Trump

He is a homegrown monster, and, whether we like it or not, he is our monster. People of good conscience will take responsibility for preventing him and his cohorts anywhere near the White House and the Supreme Court.

If Trump wins, anyone who did not vote for Hillary is personally responsible for their part in getting him elected and the consequences of that. They are responsible when people lose their healthcare, when costs for insurance and prescription drugs go up, when ever more minorities are imprisoned, when an emboldened, better armed police force is unaccountable for their actions, when torture is green lighted, even for the families of the accused, when women are denied or criminalized for seeking healthcare and reproductive rights, when conservatives control the Supreme Court for the next 30 years, when Citizens United remains the path to elections, when more protective voting rights laws are eliminated, when carbon emissions from a heavily promoted gas and coal industry accelerate causing irrevocable climate change, when college costs more, not less and student debt gets worse, when a stagnant minimum wage keeps more people in poverty, when the 1% gets even more tax breaks, when tent cities and mass deportations become routine, when hate crimes increase, when guns and mass shootings proliferate, when social security is privatized and our response to every foreign policy conflict is to go rogue from NATO allies and simply carpet bomb our enemies.

WTG, Greens.

[arcane1]

103. What a pathetic country we are.

oh well, my vote doesn't matter anyway. My state will elect Hillary no matter where my vote goes.

[HuckleB]

59. Dan Savage is spot on!

[Starry Messenger]

64. Something tells me "Pheasant" isn't suffering from much in life.

[MrScorpio]

67. DAN Skippy!

[Haveadream]

71. lol!!!!

[Demsrule86]

69. Savage nailed it.

Green are the most selfish blind voters on the planet...and many either have nothing to lose or are no smart enough to understand what Trump presidency would bring to this country. Trump is dangerous. He is the kind of guy who runs for election once and remains for life...the best case scenario is he turns the presidency into his personal enrichment vehicle...but that would mean Pence running the country ...look at Indiana if you want to see how that will go.

[DemonGoddess]

94. We really do NOT want either of 'em anywhere NEAR

the White House. Pence is my governor. He's an utter asshole.

[Demsrule86]

141. He sure is.

[zappaman]

75. Kick and rec!

[Eric J in MN]

76. Race baiting by a white man. NT

NT

[KMOD]

90. Truth telling, not race baiting.

What the heck is a Berniecrat?

[Eric J in MN]

93. Berniecrat = Democrat who supports Sanders. NT

NT

[Downtown Hound]

97. Bullshit X 1000. n/t

[uponit7771]

118. Facts say different

[kwolf68]

86. Part right, part wrong

I agree the Greens should put resources into local races. I agree it's a dog and pony show. But when the main candidates leave people wanting what do you expect? The Greens have no faith in the Democratic establishment anymore and Hillary sure does nothing to curb those fears. WHOSE fault is that? Yes, Trump is dangerous and I believe a practical vote is to vote for Clinton, but others don't feel that way. Many will NOT vote this year and many will vote third party. I blame that on who the two parties have nominated. Not some sort of selfish delusion by people who can no longer stomach voting for the "less of the worse".

[Cali_Democrat]

92. K&R....Excellent article

Dan Savage is spot on.

[thucythucy]

99. Stein and the Greens today are as deluded

as the far left in Germany in 1932. They urged their followers to do what they could to fuck up the workings of the Weimar Republic, and withdraw support from the Social Democrats, calling them "Social Fascists" -- in other words. just as bad or worse than the Nazis. The reasoning was much the same: Hitler coming to power would be a "temporary aberration" and his failed regime would quickly clear the way for a true socialist victory.

This was dangerous bullshit then (as history so tragically proved) and it's dangerous bullshit now.

[obamanut2012]

135. This This This

Starry Messenger and I have discussed this IRL many times.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

104. I was a YUGE Bernie fan, but

There really is no choice. Jill does little or nothing to earn my vote. Same for that crazy libertarian whose name was so memorable that I forgot it.

If Hillary does not win, our country is in deep deep dew dew.

[DonCoquixote]

106. I am so ready

to make this quote a signature

"“Disaster will come” if Trump is president, Savage stated. “And the people who’ll suffer are not going to be the pasty white Green Party supporters — pasty white Jill Stein and her pasty white supporters. The people who’ll suffer are going to be people of color. People of minority faiths. Queer people. Women.”

To which I add, the affluent pasty white know they will never pick up the bill for their parties, we do. We are also the maids and butlers.

[mwrguy]

108. Dan should go lick her doorknobs and coffee cups

[DemocraticWing]

111. Jill Stein's a moron, but I don't like what Savage said.

She does have supporters who are people of color or from other non-privileged groups, and I think pretending that minority leftists don't exist is something that we've had enough of this year.

I think if I was voting along on who best supported social justice, then maybe Stein's position gets there...but she mixes in too much nonsense and comes across as an idiot when talking. Throw in the fact that she has no chance and it's not a hard choice.

[Haveadream]

113. I think pretending we don't live in the real world

with a realistic choice of only two candidates is either dangerously delusional, not terribly bright or privileged enough to willfully ignore that. Stein can not legitimately be invested in social justice and still be willing to take the risk of Donald Trump being elected. Bernie knows that, conceded, endorsed Hillary and is not supporting Stein. Robert Reich knows that, endorsed Hillary and is not supporting Stein. Thom Hartmann knows that and is not supporting Stein. He also agrees with Dan Savage on this specific issue.

[greiner3]

112. But but

Ralph lost it for us in 2000.

NOT!

[Butterflies]

124. He's right

More people need to read this . . .

[Ellen Forradalom]

140. Thank you Dan

I'm with him on this